I'm finally ready to purchase a new computer for Hauptwerk and have decided on a new Mac Pro. I am trying to decide on how many cores to get. I am considering the 6-core and 8 core-models (I absolutely can't afford 12 cores). The 3.0 GHz 8-core model cost US $1,500 more than the 3.5 GHz 6-core model. I notice that the 8-core model has 25 MB of L3 cache while the 6-core model has 12 MB of L3 cache. I wonder how significant that is in terms of performance. Currently my largest sample set is the MDA Salisbury (3 vol), which I'm sure either model would be able to handle. I may want to eventually buy a large surround sound set. Given the recent discussions which have indicated that the useful lifespan of the computer / operating system may only be 5 years, I am feeling reluctant to pay the additional $1,500 for the 8 cores. However I don't want to buy something that I will outgrow in a couple years either. I appreciate any insight that forum members may care to offer. Thank you.

Yeah right. If anyone has any extra, I know someone who could be of help unloading their excess.

I'm too tired right now to look it up, but I recall Martin commented on the subject of 6 vs 8 cores a while back. My take away was that you probably wouldn't notice much difference with Hauptwerk. OTOH, I've read elsewhere that gamers would welcome the 8 cores.

If you multiply the number of cores by the number clock speed then you get 24 for the 8-core model and 21 for the 6-core. While that's a very simplistic metric for performance, it's still a starting point, and the difference between 24 and 21 isn't that much. Twice(ish) as much CPU cache should be a more significant benefit in favour of the 8-core, but it's hard to quantify it. A wild guess might be that doubling the amount of CPU cache might give something like an extra 20-25 percent polyphony (since the 6-core already has a reasonable amount per core), but that really is just a guess.

Best regards,Martin.

[Please use email or the Contact page if you need to contact us privately, rather than private forum messages.]

If the price difference is $1500, then at a price / performance level it is certainly not worth it. Save the money, especially if you are already budgeting for a replacement 5 years down the road. My lowly intel i7 (2nd generation) can still handle decent sized sets (tholen surround) with room to spare.

mdyde wrote:A wild guess might be that doubling the amount of CPU cache might give something like an extra 20-25 percent polyphony (since the 6-core already has a reasonable amount per core), but that really is just a guess.

in a many many many gigs sampleset scenario would the L1 cache size make that much of a difference? most of the sampleset data would never stay in L1 anyways I would think...

amun wrote:Hopefully Your budget is big enough to finance the by far more expensive rest of Your set-up also at the Bently-level.

amun

Thanks for your reply. Money is indeed a real consideration. I do already have 4 CMW keyboards and their pedalboard, and I have 8 Mackie HR824s, plus some M-Audio monitors and subwoofer. I will need however a new audio interface, a couple touch screen monitors, and another subwoofer. So I have a way to go yet. I will post a different message asking for input about Thunderbolt monitors.

If you multiply the number of cores by the number clock speed then you get 24 for the 8-core model and 21 for the 6-core. While that's a very simplistic metric for performance, it's still a starting point, and the difference between 24 and 21 isn't that much. Twice(ish) as much CPU cache should be a more significant benefit in favour of the 8-core, but it's hard to quantify it. A wild guess might be that doubling the amount of CPU cache might give something like an extra 20-25 percent polyphony (since the 6-core already has a reasonable amount per core), but that really is just a guess.

Thanks Martin. I appreciate your input. In any event whatever I choose has got to be a lot better than the iMac i3 that I am currently using!

sonar11 wrote:If the price difference is $1500, then at a price / performance level it is certainly not worth it. Save the money, especially if you are already budgeting for a replacement 5 years down the road. My lowly intel i7 (2nd generation) can still handle decent sized sets (tholen surround) with room to spare.

Thanks for that input. From a GHz times core basis, the 6-core seems to be the most cost effective solution. I need to take into consideration the cost of an audio interface, touchscreen monitors, etc. before making my final decision. I am looking forward to being about to play the Salisbury with a full registration!